You are currently browsing the monthly archive for May 2013.

You might think, Oh no, she’s still at it!

You’d be right. I can’t seem to get out all that seems to be in it and around it. IT being the “Rule”–or, if mental-affective flows are [become, at some point in time] the proper subject of physics/natural science–the “Law” (of Reciprocity).

I was thinking about formalizing it as a Law of Humanity, so experimented with some logical notation:

do (x) = would-want (x, S) | S = be-done-to (x, y)

where x = I, you, s/he… they
S = sentence, proposition, subordinate clause this this case
y = anyone/anything other than x

So a COROLLARY (in a more general sense rather than in the strict sense of math/Peircean logic) to the Golden Rhyming Rule popped up:

As I/you…they

do

so will I/you…they

be done

to

Thus,

do (x) = will-be (x, S) | S = be-done-to (x, y)

Doesn’t it look like intending/acting, analogous to what physics tells us about the indestructibility/changeability of Energy, may in fact be undergoing transformations, but not disappearing?

do (x, y) = be done to (x, y-or-z) 

or

do (x, y) <=> be done to (x, y-or-z)

In the colloquial idiom, “What goes around, comes around”.

I’M THINKING IT JUST MIGHT BE WORTHWHILE TO CONTINUE EXPERIMENTING WITH DERIVING A HUMAN(E) *LAW* OF A SIGNIFICANCE COMMENSURATE WITH THAT OF E=mc^2

What if one of E or m corresponds to “doing” and the other “being done to” – in the sense of an organism interacting with its environment – per e.g. Gregory Bateson’s proposed unit of evolutionary survival = organism + environment, or per  John Dewey (1916) before him?

Well, just a tiny little something to note. It looks like the rhyming version below (of the so-called “Golden Rule” – that seems to have fed into Kant’s “categorical imperative“, should the latter ring a clearer bell to you) is not recorded online. So here we go, with Creative Commons Licence sense of intellectual ownership 🙂

For Our Bio-relatives and Us Humans, Too:

Why not

do

as I/you/she/he…they’d want to

be done

to?!

As shown above, the Rhyming Rule can be variously conjugated, depending on the applicable personal point of view.

If you recall, sometime ago I blogged out a list of Golden Rule variants across time and space, in various religions/teachings and cultures – of which you may still be able to obtain a poster.

Although some of those instances may have been cross-cultural borrowings (say, Judaism ~ Christianity ~ Islam), in some other cases it looks like human societies/communities have also arrived at the same nugget “independently”. I find this significant because the nuggets of wisdom – whether initially “borrowed” or “independently arrived at” – must have persisted as a result of hundreds, and millenia, of historical years of trial and error.

So I’d venture a link to Berkeley U psychologist Dacher Keltner’s hypothesis that there are deep, survival related reasons for our species to have developed the ability, and motivation, to cooperate (see e.g. his interview in Tom Shadyac’s documentary I Am).

Evidence of altruism in animals abounds, too, including as reported in the docu above – see interview with Thom Hartmann, a.o., author of The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight.

Is there evidence – for both us and our animal relatives – that can go either way, i.e. “we” are by nature cooperative-amicable, or by nature competitive-aggressive? YES.

YET, Darwin’s evolutionary theory, for example, has been grossly misrepresented as supporting a survival-of-the-fittest worldview – and world order!!! In The Descent of Man, he argued that the strongest instinct in “man” is SYMPATHY (see D. Keltner’s interview above).

Here’s my thought [since the Golden Rhyming Rule of human conduct exists in such a lovely, portable form now]

Isn’t

the conscious and consistent,

purposful and persistent

resolution of the cooperative/competitive ambiguity our lucky chance to actually demonstrate that our claims to reason/rationality

just might

be justified?

Black-and-white DISCLAIMER. I’m only saying, more amicable than aggressive, and only certain modes of cooperation and competition – “naturally”.

Calendar

May 2013
M T W T F S S
« Apr   Jun »
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Categories

© CreativeCommonsLicense

Creative Commons License Img

accurate quoting proper attribution by/on ES & of ES